Female Proportions help..

Join 500,000+ Artists

Its' free and it takes less than 10 seconds!

Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 1 Post
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Female Proportions help..

    Hi, I have a question concerning female body proportion. I have a diagram, that I'm looking at, and I need some help figuring it out.

    Here it is: http://fineart.sk/show.php?w=902 (It's the Andrew Loomis Diagram Quick-Setup of proportions.)

    On the female diagram, does he split the top and bottom in half, then divide the bottom in half, and then divide the top portion into thirds? I measured it, but it seemed kinda off. Thanks for the help.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,169
    Thanks
    733
    Thanked 587 Times in 314 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Looks to be the case. The measurements may not be exact because Loomis probably eye-balled it.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    699
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 173 Times in 120 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Dunno about the measurements, but the position for the breasts is a bit off. Generally, the bottom curve of the breast just about lines up with the crease of the elbow. At least, it does for me, and that seems a fairly good guideline from what I've seen.

    (Despite what anime and fantasy art seems to think, breasts do have to obey gravity and do not magically levitate to appear more 'perky'. The bigger they are, the heavier and lower they'll fall. Unless the woman has a miracle bra. Chainmail bikinis don't count.)

    EDIT: Looking at the drawing again, it occurs to me that the woman is standing 'at attention' with the back very straight, which would make the breasts higher. However, if someone is standing at rest, my comment stands.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,068
    Thanks
    992
    Thanked 2,161 Times in 753 Posts
    Follows
    1
    Following
    0
    It would also be worth reading Loomis's texts. He explains these matters quite thoroughly in the book, as well as providing an abundance of other useful material. Don't just look at the pretty pictures.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Noah Bradley For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Aalter Belgium
    Posts
    1,602
    Thanks
    190
    Thanked 95 Times in 62 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    loomis was wrong; the correct female proprtion chart is something like this:

    BOOBS+ASS > Head > rest

    (seriously though, as Noah said, read the texts.. )

    WEED TORTURE WIN
    www.hyver.com -()- sketch thread

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Hyver For This Useful Post:

    Hai

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Slovakia
    Posts
    4,179
    Thanks
    5,096
    Thanked 2,049 Times in 1,108 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The sketch is not of a realistic woman, but an idealized one (8 heads tall) as used in fashion sketches and advertising.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to TASmith For This Useful Post:


  11. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    79
    Thanks
    211
    Thanked 54 Times in 41 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I was just looking at the page OP mentioned, and I thought I was going crazy. The measurements on the female diagram don't make sense. Especially compared to the previous page of proportions: http://fineart.sk/photo-references/f...rew-loomis/013

    Seeing as the figure is supposed to be 8 heads high, the Middle Point should be at 4 heads, and then 4 heads again until the heels, plus a little extra for the shoe heels as shown in the Ideal Proportions. But in the Quick Proportions page it shows 4 heads being above the Middle Point.
    The distance from head 2 to 3 or 3 to 4 doesn't seem to correspond to the other head lengths. What he seems to have done is put a head distance from the tick-mark above the 3 hds point and then reached an incorrect 4 hds point. It should be a bit lower. Still, the head lengths were incorrect from the start, because even with a correct 4 hds point they still don't reach the Middle Point.

    Such a simple diagram shouldn't give me this much confusion. Did Loomis make a mistake or am I missing something here?

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by Norkagar; April 27th, 2012 at 02:44 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Norkagar For This Useful Post:


Members who have read this thread: 2

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside
Register

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
The Art Department
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook